“IMO there are more parrelels than not in what Jesus taught and what Buddha taught especially concerning our play in game. I’m sure many Christians disagree.”
Sure there are, I’d agree. There’s also just as many if not more parallels in Satanism; ever read the Satanist Bible? It’s humanism and RPG-style morality.
"Each player pursues their own goals which is what they truly value, apart from any lip service, and reflected in thier in game actions. "
IMO, that’s what people do anyway. They do it by default. If you want to know what someone values, just watch their life. It’ll be self-evident, by definition.
What they say they value, or believe, is moot and usually pretentious bullshit.
[QUOTE=9thFloor]
“It occurs to me though that telling people about supposed admins and end game reward and punishment also has a null moral status. The manipulators find people who agree to be manipulated. It’s morally ok…right?”
I guess I’m not sure what you’re referring to here or what it has to do with anything maybe I’m being thick headed.
Morals = consequences for your actions. Those consequences mattering to your avatar depend on the avatar’s in-game goals.
Cannibal dude couldn’t be convicted of murder by definition so they got him on manslaughter and he went in for a while and then got out. That was fine by him, as it was worth furthering his in-game goal. So that consequence, which was societally imposed, was an acceptable cost (and the only cost, if we’re relegating for the sake of discussion his in-game goals down to only this one, was only one of opportunity cost of the people he couldn’t kill and eat while in prison).
What I’d say, if I’m understanding your point – and actually it’s true even if I’m not understanding your point because it applies to the whole concept regardless, is that we can’t know if it’s morally okay since morality is karma and we don’t know what the manipulators’ and manipulated’s in-game goals are.
I think there has to be a shared value system of what the in-game goal is in order to determine what’s moral if you’re going beyond one person’s own individual goals and trying to extrapolate to some kind of societal morality. There are few.
People get together and publicly declare, “these are our in-game goals” which, of course, conflict with the in-game goals of others. So they have at it.
In reality, of course, this whole in-game goal isn’t the normative moral perspective people consciously take (even though I do think it’s the practical one most people behave on), and instead they seize upon claims of extra-world rewards.
At which point, I call bullshit.
[/QUOTE]
You’re making it waaayyyy to complicated.
Just as cannibal dude and the people eaten is morally ok from thier POV in game, it’s also morally ok for for people to create religions and see if people will follow, and the people who do follow, if all concerned are pursuing their own in game goals. We don’t have to know exactly what those goals are to say, “well, if that’s how you want to play have at it”
of course it’s also morally ok to call bullshit if that lines up with your own in game goals.
[QUOTE=9thFloor]
“IMO there are more parrelels than not in what Jesus taught and what Buddha taught especially concerning our play in game. I’m sure many Christians disagree.”
Sure there are, I’d agree. There’s also just as many if not more parallels in Satanism; ever read the Satanist Bible? It’s humanism and RPG-style morality.
[/QUOTE]
No I haven’t. Sounds interesting. Is there only one. Is that the title?
"I know this may also smell like prostylisizing but honest, it’s not meant to be. I was just amused by the similarities. :)"
A “prosletyzing perspective” as I termed it (which is different from actively trying to convert people) is only annoying when it’s offensive to logic, to me; that is, when it’s seemingly unconsciously used to attempt to retrofit everything to its own beliefs even when they don’t fit.
If they do fit, then great. That’s just another perspective no problem by me.
It’s just not typically important to any given view being discussed, although it can be interesting to note the similarities; especially when and if xianity for example is subordinated to the evolution of thought and viewed – correctly, in my view – as just one thought among many that have been explored through the years.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
You’re making it waaayyyy to complicated.
Just as cannibal dude and the people eaten is morally ok from thier POV in game, it’s also morally ok for for people to create religions and see if people will follow, and the people who do follow, if all concerned are pursuing their own in game goals. We don’t have to know exactly what those goals are to say, “well, if that’s how you want to play have at it”
of course it’s also morally ok to call bullshit if that lines up with your own in game goals.
[/QUOTE]
You asked if it was moral.
By definition, we have to know what their in-game goals are if we’re going to declare their actions as moral or not (the manipulators and manipulateds, to use your terms).
I think we’re saying the same thing.
You seemed to me to be asking about societal morality, which is why the reply got complicated.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
No I haven’t. Sounds interesting. Is there only one. Is that the title?
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=9thFloor]
"Each player pursues their own goals which is what they truly value, apart from any lip service, and reflected in thier in game actions. "
IMO, that’s what people do anyway. They do it by default. If you want to know what someone values, just watch their life. It’ll be self-evident, by definition.
What they say they value, or believe, is moot and usually pretentious bullshit.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I think Jesus said something like that although not in those exact words. He proabably did say pretentious bullshit and later the gospels authors decided to tone it down.
I agree. It is the default and no matter what we say, we can’t avoid it.
[QUOTE=9thFloor]
[/QUOTE]
Thanks. And only $7.99 PArt of the fun will be the look on some people’s faces when they see it on my bookshelf.
“Why do you have that book? Is it to know the enemy?”
“No, that’s what the Bible is for” 
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
Yeah, I think Jesus said something like that although not in those exact words. He proabably did say pretentious bullshit and later the gospels authors decided to tone it down.
I agree. It is the default and no matter what we say, we can’t avoid it.
[/QUOTE]
I’m not sure we can’t avoid our default way of living, but I think we’re agreeing.
I’d hope nothing I’m saying is in the same exact words. If I start sounding like jesus, I’m going to go visit Germany and stop by North Carolina on the way. LOL :eek:
[QUOTE=9thFloor]
You asked if it was moral.
By definition, we have to know what their in-game goals are if we’re going to declare their actions as moral or not (the manipulators and manipulateds, to use your terms).
I think we’re saying the same thing.
You seemed to me to be asking about societal morality, which is why the reply got complicated.
[/QUOTE]
No I was mirroring the quote just above it. So, from their in game avatar perspective it is neither moral or immoral right? Just them pursuing their own in game goals.
[QUOTE=9thFloor]
I’m not sure we can’t avoid our default way of living, but I think we’re agreeing.
I’d hope nothing I’m saying is in the same exact words. If I start sounding like jesus, I’m going to go visit Germany and stop by North Carolina on the way. LOL :eek:
[/QUOTE]
That’s funny 
I’m just playing, but he did make that same observation several times.
I think we can change what we value with effort but I’m not sure we can avoid acting on what we truly value.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
Thanks. And only $7.99 PArt of the fun will be the look on some people’s faces when they see it on my bookshelf.
“Why do you have that book? Is it to know the enemy?”
“No, that’s what the Bible is for”
[/QUOTE]
You’ll no doubt find the ritualized aspects early on (or towards the end; I haven’t read it in a while) to be garbage insofar as they’re elaborate denunciations of christ; but i’d say they can probably be seen as allegories just like those in the bible against satan except in the case of satanism it’s against ideology represented by christ. The term satan and the name satanism is chosen to be ideologically clear (when in Rome) as to what philosophies they’re opposed to (like turn the other cheek) and to be sensational, I believe; but the core beliefs are frequently overlapping with humanism to a degree I’d say no more or less than xianity for the most part.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
No I was mirroring the quote just above it. So, from their in game avatar perspective it is neither moral or immoral right? Just them pursuing their own in game goals.
[/QUOTE]
If they’re pursing their in-game goals, then yeah that’s how it seems to me.
My point is just that we can’t know what their in-game goals are, so it’s pretty hard to say it’s moral or not without explicitly knowing that in advance.
A person can live their life a certain way and, if they’re bad at noting consequences of actions that violate their in-game goals, they may actually not be living in a way that’s consistent with their values aka in-game goals. I think over the long haul, however, people do tend to live their in-game goals and just can’t or won’t admit what they really are or have become; then again, I think you can change your in-game goals whenever you want.
[QUOTE=9thFloor]
“I know this may also smell like prostylisizing but honest, it’s not meant to be. I was just amused by the similarities. :)”
A “prosletyzing perspective” as I termed it (which is different from actively trying to convert people) is only annoying when it’s offensive to logic, to me; that is, when it’s seemingly unconsciously used to attempt to retrofit everything to its own beliefs even when they don’t fit.
If they do fit, then great. That’s just another perspective no problem by me.
It’s just not typically important to any given view being discussed, although it can be interesting to note the similarities; especially when and if xianity for example is subordinated to the evolution of thought and viewed – correctly, in my view – as just one thought among many that have been explored through the years.
[/QUOTE]
And that’s all it is. The thoughts and concepts aren’t new. I did a lot of reading on other religions when I left my church and the same concepts keep coming up cloaked in different mythology.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
That’s funny I’m just playing, but he did make that same observation several times.
I think we can change what we value with effort but I’m not sure we can avoid acting on what we truly value.
[/QUOTE]
That’s probably true. It gets Freudian there.
Oh, and I know he made the observation (I’ve read the bible, was raised xian, etc.), I just meant if I start using the identical language to make the observation I’m jumping in an oven. :eek:
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
And that’s all it is. The thoughts and concepts aren’t new. I did a lot of reading on other religions when I left my church and the same concepts keep coming up cloaked in different mythology.
[/QUOTE]
Oh, definitely of course. Because xianity is derivative. It’s just postmodern zoroastrianism. And you can go before that. Etc., etc.
The notion of xianity that’s so bold is that it purports to encapsulate those earlier beliefs and make them optimal; which is a common MO of evolving religions like the romans would do when conquering new areas. It’s related to A. Coulter’s recent comment about xianity being the way to ‘perfect’ jews. That’s their concept.
[QUOTE=9thFloor]
If they’re pursing their in-game goals, then yeah that’s how it seems to me.
My point is just that we can’t know what their in-game goals are, so it’s pretty hard to say it’s moral or not without explicitly knowing that in advance.
A person can live their life a certain way and, if they’re bad at noting consequences of actions that violate their in-game goals, they may actually not be living in a way that’s consistent with their values aka in-game goals. I think over the long haul, however, people do tend to live their in-game goals and just can’t or won’t admit what they really are or have become; then again, I think you can change your in-game goals whenever you want.
[/QUOTE]
True. But you have to be honest and realize what your in game goals are before you can effectively change them. Lots of people aren’t as you observed.
[QUOTE=9thFloor]
That’s probably true. It gets Freudian there.
Oh, and I know he made the observation (I’ve read the bible, was raised xian, etc.), I just meant if I start using the identical language to make the observation I’m jumping in an oven. :eek:
[/QUOTE]
I see Of course the identical languge wouldn’t be understood by too many people, but if you started spouting thees and thous you’d get some interesting looks.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
True. But you have to be honest and realize what your in game goals are before you can effectively change them. Lots of people aren’t as you observed.
[/QUOTE]
The guy that got eaten was. LOL
Yeah, I agree; I think most people don’t want to look at themselves like that.